Monthly Archives: April 2014

Food Contract Labs Are Taking a Big Bite Out of Food Safety Testing

In the past 5 years, food contract labs (FCLs) have shown a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) that exceeds overall growth in the food safety testing market. Clearly, FCLs are taking market share from food plant labs (FPLs).

As covered in last week’s blog, the 40,000 food plants worldwide are finding the running of in-plant food labs to be increasingly complex. Faced with FSMA and the possible requirement of lab accreditation, particularly for analysis of food safety compliance samples, more and more food companies are questioning the role and scope of their food plant labs (FPLs)—and considering alternatives.

One alternative is to utilize a food contract lab (FCL) for all compliance samples while continuing to analyze other food safety samples at the FPL. Another is to shut down the food plant lab entirely and utilize FCLs for all food safety test analysis. Yet a third is to have a food contract lab locate a ‘lab-in-a-box’ just outside the food plant or to have the FCL take over the food plant lab operations.

Salmonella, food safety testing, food contract lab

Strategic Consulting, Inc. (SCI) has been monitoring food safety testing for 15+ years, and has documented this shift in business from FPLs to outside labs. Based on data from SCI’s thousands of interviews with food plant QA/QC managers, there is a clear trend in food plants to send samples outside for analysis. The following chart is based on SCI interviews with U.S. food plants regarding where Salmonella samples are analyzed. In 2013, 61% of U.S. food plants sent Salmonella samples outside for analysis. Just twelve years ago, in 2001, the reverse was true, and 63% of the U.S. food plants did the analysis at food plant labs.

At one point all food plants had laboratories. In the 1970s, a few entrepreneurs began what has now grown into a thriving food contract lab industry. Many of the early entrepreneurs established outside laboratories with their own expertise as the foundation. Acting as subject matter experts and consultants, these scientist-entrepreneurs provided knowledge that helped their food industry clients solve food safety issues. Many of the early food contract labs were microbiology-based, due to industry needs and the lower cost of entry for micro versus other types of testing. These early FCLs grew through personalized service, expert consulting, scientific proficiency and strong client relationships. Over time, FCLs added basic chemistry services as necessary to support the needs of food company clients.

food contract lab, food safety testing

According to Strategic Consulting’s newest market research report, Food Contract Lab Report, there are 2,350 FCLs worldwide and they generated revenues of more than $3.0 billion in 2013. In fact, over the past five years, the food contract lab industry has shown a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) that exceeds overall growth in the food safety testing market. Clearly, FCLs are taking market share from the food plant labs.


Food Contract Lab Market

The FCL growth rate varies slightly by geographic region and business area (microbiology, chemistry, services) but frankly, all areas are growing well.

FCL Geographic Region Analysis

  • Europe is the largest region based on total FCL revenues, but is showing slower growth than other geographic regions. Chemistry revenues remain strong in the EU.
  • North America is second in total revenues, but is catching the EU, driven by large increases in microbiology revenues.
  • Asia and the rest of the world (ROW) have the smallest total revenues but the greatest growth potential of the four geographic regions.

FCL Business Area Analysis

  • The microbiology business area is second in total revenues but growing quickly, with increases in both routine micro and pathogen analysis.
  • Chemistry is the largest business area but slowing in growth compared to the other business areas.
  • Currently the smallest, the Services business area is growing quite quickly due to increasing demand from food companies.

The future for food contract laboratories looks strong, and five years out, SCI expects FCLs to have continued their growth in market share. FSMA will push companies outside the U.S. (OUS) to utilize accredited labs for compliance testing, which will drive rapid growth for FCLs particularly in the markets in Asia and Latin America.

Next: The evolving nature of the food contract lab business.

 

Tagged , , , , , , ,

FSMA & Lab Accreditation: Tipping Point for Food Safety Testing Labs?

Will FSMA and the push for accreditation of food safety testing laboratories be the tipping point in moving analysis of food samples from food plant labs to contract testing labs?

Food safety is constantly in the news, especially in the U.S. Food recalls happen with too much frequency, and when they do, they grab front-page headlines. The underlying concern is that the food we eat each day isn’t as safe as it could be. Given this fear, food production, food service and food retail companies and government regulators have increased efforts to ensure food safety, which translates into increased food safety testing.

In fact, the global market for food safety testing has grown roughly 5-10% annually, with growth in some geographic regions and testing areas (North America and pathogen testing, for example) at even higher rates. Strategic Consulting has documented this growth in food safety testing over the last 15 years in 18 market research reports.

Food Safety Test Analysis in Food Plant Labs

Until about 30 years ago, food safety testing was conducted in laboratories based at the food processing plant. Food samples collected from raw materials, the production environment or final products were taken to the food plant lab (FPL) to be analyzed. SCI research estimates that there are approximately 40,000 food plants worldwide with 25 or greater employees and, at one point, all of them had FPLs.

food safety testing, pathogen analysis, food industry labToday’s food safety tests and analysis are more complex. Test instruments are more expensive, operator training needs have increased, and documentation requirements are more extensive and involved. In addition, some food companies have restricted the types of tests (e.g. pathogen tests) that can be analyzed in the plant, further impacting the value of in-plant labs. All in all, running a FPL and generating quality data has gotten tougher.

 

food industry, food safety testing, micro labAs a result, food plants are debating whether to conduct food safety test analysis themselves, or to send the analysis outside to corporate labs or independent food contract labs (FCLs). As of 2013, SCI research found that just 86% of food plants still run FPLs.

In response to the public’s growing concerns about food safety, there have been a number of regulatory and food industry initiatives in recent years. In the U.S., the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) was signed into law in 2011 and implementation is ongoing. Industry alliances like the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) and the Food Laboratory Alliance also have emerged. A common goal of many of these initiatives to regain consumer confidence is the accreditation of food safety testing labs, to ensure that accurate and consistent data is being used to assess food plant safety.

Accreditation of Food Safety Testing Laboratories

Currently, most FPLs are not accredited. Recent SCI research found that just 18% of QA/QC managers said their food plant labs were accredited, and other sources have reported this percentage even lower.

food industry, food safety testing lab, accreditation

Lab accreditation is not trivial, and brings added responsibilities and costs. A sizable initial investment is usually required in order to put systems in place and provide proper training for staff. The review fee for accreditation can run $15,000 or more and, once accredited, labs can expect additional ongoing costs for staffing, management and overall compliance.

Merriam-Webster defines the “tipping point” as the critical point in a situation, process or system beyond which a significant and often unstoppable effect or change takes place. Will the drive for lab accreditation be the tipping point for food plant labs, the point at which the bulk of analysis of food samples moves outside the plant to corporate labs or contract testing labs? We think so.

In our conversations with food plant QA/QC managers and executives, we hear more and more questioning whether running a food plant lab is part of the plant’s core competencies. Are they truly adding value by having a FPL or are they just adding costs and complexities?

Food plants can get fast, quality test results from corporate labs or from increasingly sophisticated (and competitive) food contract testing laboratories. Some FCL companies are even willing to locate food safety testing services in a trailer right at the food plant, or to come in and operate the food plant’s lab outright. Additionally, more and more food company customers, including global food retail and food service companies, are requesting analytical results provided by an accredited third-party lab rather than the food plant itself.

Data from our new report, Food Contract Lab Report (FCLR), indicate that things have tipped, and that the food contract lab market is growing faster than the food safety testing market on the whole. Clearly FCLs are taking market share.

In our next post: Growth in the independent food contract laboratory market

Tagged , , , , , , ,